DOCSLIB.ORG

Pidgins & Creoles

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Pidgins & Creoles An introduction to contact linguistics 1 What do we mean by language contact? • Any sort of situation where different languages might interact • Separate communities living close to each other (think big multilingual countries!) • Multiple languages spoken by the same people (one ethnic group, several languages) • Multiple languages within the same community with one language in common (for example…?) 2 Language contact in New Zealand • For example, New Zealand! • Top languages in NZ (by number of speakers, 2013): • English • Māori • Samoan • Hindi • Mandarin 3 Language contact can result in… • Bilingualism • Codeswitching • Pidgins • Creoles • Mixed languages • Nothing? 4 Pidgins & Creoles • Not necessarily formed with just contact of any sort • Historically, what kind of contact has resulted in these languages? • slave trade/ indentured labour • forced movement of people • separation of speech communities • Intense social pressure 5 APiCS map 6 http://apics-online.info/contributions Pidgin vs Creole Pidgin Creole Second language Native language Restricted use Full range of uses Grammatically highly impoverished Grammatically ? (we’ll come back to this) In common: relatively stable (from later stages of formation onward), result of contact between two or more languages, can be found in many different parts of the world 7 What’s in a name? • Many creoles called “creole” or equivalent • St. Lucia: Kwéyòl • Martinique: Kréyol • Guadeloupe: Kréyòl • Haiti: Kreyòl • Seychelles, Mauritius: Kreol • Sierra Leone: Krio • (northern) Australia: Kriol • Guinea-Bissau: Kriyol • Patois/patwa also a common term 8 What’s in a name? • Some creoles called “pidgin” or equivalent: • Tok Pisin • Hawaiian Pidgin • Cameroon Pidgin English • Community choice and the role of linguists • Referring to language by ‘technically correct’ term in academic environments/conversations, publications, etc.: • Telling the community what they should call their language: 9 Pidgins - definition a pidgin is a conventionalised language formed from close and repeated contact between groups of people with no language in common (Velupillai 2015) 10 Pidgins - uses • Where no other lingua franca exists • Usually limited to use for which it developed trade pidgin: vocabulary specific to trade, general greetings (small talk) e.g. Yimas-Arafundi Pidgin (Papua New Guinea): language between men of certain clans in Yimas village and Arafundi-speaking village Auwim in their trade interactions fell out of use in the 1950s replaced functionally by Tok Pisin 11 Pidgins - examples • Basque-Icelandic Pidgin • spoken in 17th century Iceland • possibly brought by Basque sailors • Germanic, Romance, and Basque vocabulary • Russenorsk • Russian + Norwegian • fishermen and traders in the Arctic • 18th-19th century • (Kyakhta) Russian-Chinese Pidgin • 18th-20th century • used by traders • named after Kyakhta, town in Russia on the border of Mongolia 12 Creoles - definition • A ‘nativized’ pidgin: pidgin becomes native language for a community/ subset of the community • Lexifier/superstrate + substrates = creole • Lexifier: the language from which the creole draws its vocabulary • Substrate(s): the language(s) from which the grammatical features are drawn, usually the lower prestige language(s), the ones the population already spoke • Tend to be grouped according to lexifier language 13 Creoles - definition • Sociohistorical definition: • Intense language contact, often forced • No language in common • Reliance on the one language everyone had access to (the eventual lexifier) • Creole formation environments usually meant no formal learning of the target language • Structural definition (this one is a bit more controversial!): • “the world’s simplest grammars are creole grammars” (title, McWhorter 2005) • *simple in the sense of how ideas are expressed, not which ideas can be expressed • creole exceptionalists vs. ‘creoles are not structurally distinct’ 14 Creoles - uses • usually the native language of a majority population – everyday communication • can have certain connotations attached to its use, depending on the country/language, e.g.: • telling someone off • when the conversation becomes more serious • “when we want to exaggerate something we say it in creole” • identity – marking a group (especially common among speakers overseas) 15 Creole orthography • Various historical reasons mean that creoles tend to be oral languages • Some have developed orthographies e.g. Haiti, Jamaica, St. Lucia, etc. • …but having official orthographies does not guarantee speakers will use them! • especially if orthographies (and the creoles themselves) are not taught in schools • People may just use their own spellings which generally represent pronunciation quite closely, speakers will understand each other • …but some spellings are ‘weird’ or just plain wrong • “drink de riddem” ad for Coruba (found in St. Luke’s) • drink di riddim 16 Creoles - examples Bislama • lingua franca in Vanuatu • English-lexified • One of several related Pacific creoles: Pijin (Solomon Islands), Tok Pisin (Papua New Guinea), others • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NrSATT7Y7M 17 Creoles - examples Martinique Creole • French-lexified • Closely related to varieties in Guadeloupe, Dominica and St. Lucia • Also related to Haitian Creole (less close) • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kFzjAR-05M 18 Language contact: not a single event! • Most creoles formed ~300 years ago • Spoken in countries where other languages are also spoken • e.g. in the Caribbean, European language fills the function of “standard” variety • creoles often spoken in informal contexts (for those who have access to > 1 language) 19 Creole contact – creole + lexifier • Haitian Creole, French-based + French (official language) • Result = diglossia: a situation in which two languages are used within a community but in distinct contexts • Usually resulting in a ‘high’ (H) variety and a ‘low’ (L) variety • French generally the language of government, education, etc.; seen as the ‘high’ variety • Haitian Creole the everyday language; seen as the ‘low’ variety • Jamaican Creole, English-based creole + (Jamaican) English, official language • Result = creole continuum (or ‘post-creole continuum’) 20 Creole continuum • ‘meso’ = middle • A mixture of features basilect mesolect acrolect • Furthest away from • More or less standard equivalent to the • Most difficult for non- country’s standard native speakers to form understand 21 Continuum examples • Jamaican Creole/ English Acrolect: I am eatin(g) I is eatin I eatin Mi eatin Mi a eat Basilect: Mi a nyam (Sebba 1997) 22 Continuum examples • St. Lucian Kwéyòl-Creole English ‘The boy eats pepper’ bòi la ka manjé piman bòi la ka it pèpa bòi la dòz it pèpa di bòi iting pèpa (Dalphinis 1985) • Notice there are not three distinct, identifiable points but a continuous continuum of variation 23 Factors affecting continuum position • urban-rural divide • education level • socio-economic status • parents’/guardians’ languages basilect mesolect acrolect 24 Attitudes to creoles (and pidgins) • 1844 publication on St. Lucian French-based creole: “[…] It is in short, the French language, stripped of its manly and dignified ornaments and travestied for the accommodation of children and toothless old women. […]” • Those ideas don’t disappear completely – long history of trying to prevent people from speaking a creole (their native language) • Standard (European) language of instruction in schools 25 How attitudes affect speakers • Internalised negative attitudes towards creoles • Manifests especially in conversations about school • Teaching students in their own language vs. in the “prestige” language? 26 27 Changing attitudes • Orthographies developed • Special programmes for learning the creole in some countries • Integration into schooling e.g. Haiti • Dedicated celebrations e.g. Jounen Kwéyòl 28 Creole contact – creole + Not-Lexifier* *not a technical term • creole formed, lexifier population left • Louisiana Creole French • Korlai • Nicaraguan Creole English • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsaLfwqxGEw • Extra contact: lexifier population left, new contact language formed • St. Lucian/Dominican case • Unserdeutsch 29 Case study: Language contact in St. Lucia 30 A quick history • Indigenous population of Arawak people, taken over by Carib people but relations with remaining Arawak women results in a new genetic mixture, Island Caribs • First official claim on the island 1635 by the French • Changed hands 18 times, but very little interest in the day-to- day running of the island • Final handover to the British in 1814, in power until St. Lucian independence 1972 31 Language contact in St. Lucia • Official language: English • Other major language: Kwéyòl/ Patwa • Now a third variety: St. Lucia Contact English (St. Lucia Creole English?) 32 Language contact in St. Lucia • Now a third variety: St. Lucia Contact English (St. Lucia Creole English?) (1) muuv in do reen sòti an lapli-a ‘Get out of the rain.’ (Garrett 2003: 174) c.f. Sors de la pluie (2) Pu ki u ka kwiyé shê u? For what you are calling you dog? Why are you calling your dog? (Midgett 1970: 165) 33 An example • Collected October 2017 in St. Lucia • Listen out for codeswitching! • Most of the vocabulary is in English, but what’s different? 34 An example What’s different? you know she dress nice and thing that day he dancing with the girl it can make you see things that you not real seeing he thinking is at the girl home he going he reach all in the sulphur springs [tourist attraction in St. Lucia] when he check is a anthole 35 An example What’s different? you know she dress nice and thing that day he dancing with the girl it can make you see things that you not real seeing he thinking is at the girl home he going he reach all in the sulphur springs [tourist attraction in St. Lucia] when he check is a anthole 36 Cool resources • The Atlas of Pidgin and Creole Language Structures • online http://apics-online.info/ and three volumes available in the library • YouTube (wikitongues) • Wikipedia (with some caution!) 37.
Recommended publications
  • The Case of Nominal Plural Marking in Zamboanga Chabacano

    The Case of Nominal Plural Marking in Zamboanga Chabacano

    Language Documentation & Conservation Special Publication No. 19 Documentation and Maintenance of Contact Languages from South Asia to East Asia ed. by Mário Pinharanda-Nunes & Hugo C. Cardoso, pp.141–173 http:/nflrc.hawaii.edu/ldc/sp19 4 http://hdl.handle.net/10125/24908 Documenting online writing practices: The case of nominal plural marking in Zamboanga Chabacano Eduardo Tobar Delgado Universidade de Vigo Abstract The emergence of computer-mediated communication has brought about new opportunities for both speakers and researchers of minority or under-described languages. This paper shows how the analysis of spontaneous contemporary language samples from online social networks can make a contribution to the documentation and description of languages like Chabacano, a Spanish-derived creole spoken in the Philippines. More specifically, we focus on nominal plural marking in the Zamboangueño variety, a still imperfectly understood feature, by examining a corpus composed of texts from online sources. The attested combination of innovative and vestigial features requires a close look at the high contact environment, different levels of metalinguistic awareness or even some language ideologies. The findings shed light on the wide variety of plural formation strategies which resulted from the contact of Spanish with Philippine languages. Possible triggers, such as animacy, definiteness or specificity, are also examined and some future research areas suggested. Keywords: nominal plural marking, Zamboangueño Chabacano, number, creole languages Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License 142 Eduardo Tobar Delgado 1. Introduction1 Zamboanga Chabacano (also known as Zamboangueño or Chavacano) is one of the three extant varieties of Philippine Creole Spanish or Chabacano and totals around 500,000 speakers in and around Zamboanga City in the Southern Philippines.
  • 12 English Dialect Input to the Caribbean

    12 English Dialect Input to the Caribbean

    12 English dialect input to the Caribbean 1 Introduction There is no doubt that in the settlement of the Caribbean area by English speakers and in the rise of varieties of English there, the question of regional British input is of central importance (Rickford 1986; Harris 1986). But equally the two other sources of specific features in anglophone varieties there, early creolisation and independent developments, have been given continued attention by scholars. Opinions are still divided on the relative weight to be accorded to these sources. The purpose of the present chapter is not to offer a description of forms of English in the Caribbean – as this would lie outside the competence of the present author, see Holm (1994) for a resum´ e–b´ ut rather to present the arguments for regional British English input as the historical source of salient features of Caribbean formsofEnglish and consider these arguments in the light of recent research into both English in this region and historical varieties in the British Isles. This is done while explicitly acknowledging the role of West African input to forms of English in this region. This case has been argued eloquently and well, since at least Alleyne (1980) whose views are shared by many creolists, e.g. John Rickford. But the aim of the present volume, and specifically of the present chapter, is to consider overseas varieties of English in the light of possible continuity of input formsofEnglish from the British Isles. This concern does not seek to downplay West African input and general processes of creolisation, which of course need to be specified in detail,1 butrather tries to put the case for English input and so complement other views already available in the field.
  • Pidgins and Creoles - Genevieve Escure

    Pidgins and Creoles - Genevieve Escure

    LINGUISTICS - Pidgins and Creoles - Genevieve Escure PIDGINS AND CREOLES Genevieve Escure Department of English, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA Keywords: contact language, lingua franca, (post)creole continuum, basilect, mesolect, acrolect, substrate, superstrate, bioprogram, monogenesis, polygenesis, relexification, variability, code switching, covert prestige, overt prestige, colonization, identity, nativization. Contents 1. Introduction 2. Some general properties of pidgins and creoles 3. Pidgins: Incipient communication 3.1. Chinese Pidgin English 3.2. Russenorsk. 3.3. Hawaiian Pidgin English 4. Creoles: Expansion, stabilization and variability 4.1. Basilect 4.2. Acrolect 4.3. Mesolect 5. Theoretical models and current trends in PC studies 5.1. Early models 5.2. Developments of the substratist position 5.3. Developments of the universalist position: The bioprogram 6. The (post)creole continuum and decreolization 7. New trends 7.1. Sociohistorical evidence 7.2. Demographic explanations 7.3. Acquisition 8. Conclusion Acknowledgements Glossary Bibliography Biographical Sketch UNESCO – EOLSS Summary Pidgins and creolesSAMPLE are languages that arose CHAPTERSin the context of temporary events (e.g., trade, seafaring, and even tourism), or enduring traumatic social situations such as slavery or wars. In the latter context, subjugated people were forced to create new languages for communication. Long stigmatized, those languages provide valuable insight into the mental mechanisms that enable individuals to use their innate capacity
  • Author Index

    Author Index

    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-61998-1 - Functional Categories Pieter Muysken Index More information Author index Abney, S. 9, 37, 38, 53–56, 60–63, 67, 228 Bersick, M. 108 Aboh, E. 226 Besten, H. den 213 Abu-Akel, A. 116 Bhatnagar, S. C. 136 Adams, C. 140 Bickerton, D. 10, 191, 246–250 Adams, D. Q. 88, 89 Binder, J. R. 108 Aguil´oS. J., F. 178 Binnick, R. I. 23 Ahls´en,E. 131, 135 Bishop, D. V. M. 140 Aikhenvald, A. Y. 162 Blakemore, D. 49 Akmajian, A. 58 Bloomfield, L. 229 Alb´o,X. 49, 178 Blutner, R. 7 Allen, M. 109 Boas, F. 14, 60 Alpatov, V. M. 28 Bock, K. 100 Ameka, F. 51 Bolle, J. 163 Anderson, S. A. 46 Boretzky, N. 224 Aquilina, J. 185–187 Borsley, R. D. Aronoff, M. 156, 160, 184 Bot, C. de 150 Aslin, R. 114 Boumans, L. 170 Asodanoe, J. 198 Boyes Braem, P. 156 Auger, J. 48 Bradley, D. C. 107, 108 Austerlitz, R. 92 Broadaway, R. 232 Award, J. 15 Brown, C. 99, 108 Brown, D. 36 Backus, A. 164, 172 Brown, R. 111–115 Badecker, W. 131 Bruyn, A. 6, 192, 193 Baerman, M. 36 Burt, M. 119, 120 Bahan, B. 155, 156, 159, 160 Butterworth, B. Baharav, E. 136 Bybee, J. 3, 57 Bailey A. L. 116 Bailey, N. 120 Calteaux, K. 165, 166 Baker, M. C. 4, 6, 9, 21, 53, 61, 65 Campbell, C. 233 Bakker, P. 184, 211–214, 218–221 Campbell, L. 95, 144 Bard, E. G.
  • Making Sense of "Bad English"

    Making Sense of "Bad English"

    MAKING SENSE OF “BAD ENGLISH” Why is it that some ways of using English are considered “good” and others are considered “bad”? Why are certain forms of language termed elegant, eloquent, or refined, whereas others are deemed uneducated, coarse, or inappropriate? Making Sense of “Bad English” is an accessible introduction to attitudes and ideologies towards the use of English in different settings around the world. Outlining how perceptions about what constitutes “good” and “bad” English have been shaped, this book shows how these principles are based on social factors rather than linguistic issues and highlights some of the real-life consequences of these perceptions. Features include: • an overview of attitudes towards English and how they came about, as well as real-life consequences and benefits of using “bad” English; • explicit links between different English language systems, including child’s English, English as a lingua franca, African American English, Singlish, and New Delhi English; • examples taken from classic names in the field of sociolinguistics, including Labov, Trudgill, Baugh, and Lambert, as well as rising stars and more recent cutting-edge research; • links to relevant social parallels, including cultural outputs such as holiday myths, to help readers engage in a new way with the notion of Standard English; • supporting online material for students which features worksheets, links to audio and news files, further examples and discussion questions, and background on key issues from the book. Making Sense of “Bad English” provides an engaging and thought-provoking overview of this topic and is essential reading for any student studying sociolinguistics within a global setting.
  • Anala Lb. Straine 2016 Nr.1

    Anala Lb. Straine 2016 Nr.1

    ANALELE UNIVERSITĂŢII BUCUREŞTI LIMBI ŞI LITERATURI STRĂINE 2016 – Nr. 1 SUMAR • SOMMAIRE • CONTENTS LINGVISTIC Ă / LINGUISTIQUE / LINGUISTICS ELENA L ĂCĂTU Ş, Romanian Aspectual Verbs: Control and Restructuring ............... 3 COSTIN-VALENTIN OANCEA, The Category of Number in Present-Day English(es): Variation and Context ............................................................................................ 25 LEAH NACHMANI, EFL Teachers’ Perspectives on Reading Acquisition within a Multi-Cultural Learning Environment .................................................................. 41 ANDREI A. AVRAM, Diagnostic Features of English Pidgins/Creoles: New Evidence from West African Pidgin English and Krio ........................................................ 55 MIHAI CRUDU, Zum Lexem Herr und zu dessen Auftauchen in Wortbildungen und Phrasemen ............................................................................................................... 79 CAMELIA M ĂDĂLINA ŞTEFAN, On Latin-Old Swedish Language Contact through Loanwords ............................................................................................................... 89 * Recenzii • Comptes rendus • Reviews .................................................................................. 105 Contributors ........................................................................................................................ 111 ROMANIAN ASPECTUAL VERBS: CONTROL AND RESTRUCTURING ELENA L ĂCĂTU Ş* Abstract The aim of the present paper is to investigate
  • Journal of Postcolonial Writing the Field of Pidgin

    Journal of Postcolonial Writing the Field of Pidgin

    This article was downloaded by: [Stanford University] On: 3 June 2011 Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 731786911] Publisher Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37- 41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Journal of Postcolonial Writing Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t713735330 The field of Pidgin-Creole studies: A review article on Loreto Todd's Pidgins and Creoles. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1974 John Rickforda a University of Guyana, To cite this Article Rickford, John(1977) 'The field of Pidgin-Creole studies: A review article on Loreto Todd's Pidgins and Creoles. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1974', Journal of Postcolonial Writing, 16: 2, 477 — 513 To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/17449857708588494 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17449857708588494 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
  • A Discrete Co-Systems Approach to Language Variation on the Panamanian Island of Bastimentos

    A Discrete Co-Systems Approach to Language Variation on the Panamanian Island of Bastimentos

    University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics Volume 7 Issue 3 Papers from NWAV 29 Article 20 2001 A Discrete Co-Systems Approach to Language Variation on the Panamanian Island of Bastimentos Peter Snow Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl Recommended Citation Snow, Peter (2001) "A Discrete Co-Systems Approach to Language Variation on the Panamanian Island of Bastimentos," University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics: Vol. 7 : Iss. 3 , Article 20. Available at: https://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol7/iss3/20 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol7/iss3/20 For more information, please contact [email protected]. A Discrete Co-Systems Approach to Language Variation on the Panamanian Island of Bastimentos This working paper is available in University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics: https://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol7/iss3/20 A Discrete Co-Systems Approach to Language Variation on the Panamanian Island of Bastimentos 1 Peter Snow 1 Introduction In its ideal form, the phenomenon of the creole continuum as originally described by DeCamp (1971) and Bickerton (1973) may be understood as a result of the process of decreolization that occurs wherever a creole is in direct contact with its lexifier. This contact between creole languages and the languages that provide the majority of their lexicons leads to synchronic variation in the form of a continuum that reflects the unidirectional process of decreolization. The resulting continuum of varieties ranges from the "basilect" (most markedly creole), through intermediate "mesolectal" varie­ ties (less markedly creole), to the "acrolect" (least markedly creole or the lexifier language itself).
  • Describing Creole: Researcher Perspectives on Endangerment and Multilingualism in the Chabacano Communities

    Describing Creole: Researcher Perspectives on Endangerment and Multilingualism in the Chabacano Communities

    Describing creole: researcher perspectives on endangerment and multilingualism in the Chabacano communities Eeva Sippola University of Helsinki This paper discusses perspectives on language description and endangerment in creole communities, with a special focus on Chabacano-speaking communities in the Philippines. I will show how, from the early days of research on these varieties, linguists with an interest in Chabacano often present the varieties under study as endangered in a moribund state or aim to describe a ‘pure’ Chabacano system without Philippine or English influences, silencing a great deal of the daily multilingualism and hybrid language practices that have always been present in the communities. In general, this paper sheds light on the complex dynamics of discourses on endangerment and authenticity in research about multilingual communities. It also contributes to the discussion on how these types of contexts challenge common Western assumptions about language loss and on authenticity in multilingual communities. Keywords: Chabacano, linguistic research, ideology, authenticity, multilingual communities. 1. Introduction This paper examines practices and ideologies of language description and documentation in the Chabacano-speaking communities in the Philippines. Chabacano is the common name used for creole varieties that have Spanish as the lexifier and Philippine languages as the adstrates and that have historically been spoken in several locations in the Philippines. There is documentation of varieties in Zamboanga, Cotabato, and Davao in Mindanao in the southern Philippines, and in the Ermita district of Manila, Cavite City, and Ternate in the Manila Bay region of the northern island of Luzon. They are for the most part mutually intelligible, but there are sociohistorical circumstances and linguistic differences that distinguish them (Lesho & Sippola 2013, 2014).
  • Hawaiian Creole English and Caucasian Identity

    Hawaiian Creole English and Caucasian Identity

    Hawaiian Creole English and Caucasian Identity Karen Mattison Yabuno I. INTRODUCTION Hawaiian Creole English, commonly known as Pidgin, is widely spoken in Hawaii. In 2015, it was recognized by the US Census Bureau as a third official language of Hawaii, following English and Hawaiian（Laddaran, 2015）. Pidgin is distinct and separate from Hawaii English（Drager, 2012）, which is also widely spoken in Hawaii but not recognized as an official language of the state. Pidgin arose among immigrant groups on the pineapple plantations and was the dominant language of the workers’ children by the 1920’s（Tamura, 1993）. Historically, an ability to speak Pidgin established one as ‘local’ to Hawaii, while English was seen to be part of the haole（Caucasian） identity （Drager, 2012）. Although non-English speaking Caucasians also worked on the plantations, the term ‘local’ has come to mean those descended from Asian immigrant groups, as well as indigenous Hawaiians. These days, about half of the population of Hawaii speak Pidgin（Sakoda and Siegel, 2003）. Caucasians born, raised, or residing in Hawaii may also understand and speak Pidgin. However, there can be a negative reaction to Caucasians speaking Pidgin, even when the Caucasians self-identify as ‘locals’. This is discussed in the YouTube video, Being White in Hawaii（Timahification, 2014）, and parodied in the YouTube video, Hawaiian Haole（YouRight, 2016）. Why is it offensive for a Caucasian to speak Pidgin? To answer this question, this paper will examine the parody video, Hawaiian Haole; ‘local’ ―189― Hawaiian Creole English and Caucasian Identity identity in Hawaii; and race in Hawaii. Finally, the viewpoints of three ‘local’ haole will be presented.
  • Nominal Contact in Michif. by Carrie Gillon and Nicole Rosen , with Verna De - Montigny

    Nominal Contact in Michif. by Carrie Gillon and Nicole Rosen , with Verna De - Montigny

    806 LANGUAGE, VOLUME 9 5, NUMBER 4 (201 9) Corbett, Greville G. 2009. Canonical inflection classes. Selected proceedings of the 6th Décembrettes , ed. by Fabio Montermini, Gilles Boyé, and Jessie Tseng, 1–11. Online: http://www.lingref.com/cpp/decemb /6/paper2231.pdf . Dahl, Östen . 2004. The growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity . Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Harley, Heidi. 2008. When is a syncretism more than a syncretism? Impoverishment, metasyncretism, and underspecification. Phi theory: Phi-features across modules and interfaces , ed. by Daniel Harbour, David Adger, and Susana Béjar, 251–94. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Parker, Jeff, and Andrea D. Sims. 2020. Irregularity, paradigmatic layers, and the complexity of inflection class systems: A study of Russian nouns. Morphological complexities , ed. by Peter Arkadiev and Francesco Gardani. Oxford: Oxford University Press, to appear. Sagot, Benoît, and Géraldine Walther. 2011 . Non-canonical inflection: Data, formalisation and com - plexity measures. SFCM 2011: The second workshop on Systems and Frameworks for Computational Morphology , ed. by Cerstin Mahlow and Michael Piotrowski, 23–45. Berlin: Springer. Stump, Gregory T . 2016. Inflectional paradigms: Content and form at the syntax-morphology interface . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zwicky, Arnold M. 1992. Some choices in the theory of morphology. Formal grammar: Theory and imple - mentation , ed. by Robert Levine, 327–71. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Department of Linguistics 1712 Neil Avenue Columbus, OH 43210 [[email protected]] Nominal contact in Michif. By Carrie Gillon and Nicole Rosen , with Verna De - montigny . (Oxford studies of endangered languages.) Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2018. Pp. xxii, 202. ISBN 9780198795339. $88 (Hb). Reviewed by Sarah G.
  • Pidgins and Creoles

    Pidgins and Creoles

    12/7/2015 LNGT0101 Announcements Introduction to Linguistics • HW 4 sent to your inboxes. Average score is 45/50. • Final HW is due today, and then you can celebrate. • Any questions on your final papers? Lecture #23 Dec 7th, 2015 2 Announcements Word play! • I’ll give out course response forms on Wednesday. So, please be there to fill them out! • Photo today? 3 4 Ambiguity again! Today’s agenda • Discussion of pidgins and creoles. 5 6 1 12/7/2015 Language contact What is a pidgin? Creating language out of thin air: What is a creole? The case of Pidgins and Creoles 7 8 Origin of Hawaiian Pidgin A sample of Hawaiian Pidgin • http://sls.hawaii.edu/pidgin/whatIsPidgin.php • http://www.mauimagazine.net/Maui‐ Magazine/July‐August‐2015/Da‐State‐of‐da‐ State/ 9 10 How about we listen to this English‐based speech variety? • English‐based speech variety • How much did you understand? • Maybe we can try reading. Not sure it’ll help, but let’s try. 11 12 2 12/7/2015 Emergence of Pidgins and Creoles Pidginization areas • A pidgin is a system of communication used by people who do not know each other’s languages but need to communicate with one another for trading or other purposes. • By definition, then, a pidgin is not a natural language. It’s a made‐up “makeshift” language. Notice, crucially, that it does not have native speakers. 13 14 The lexicons of Pidgins are typically based Pidgins are linguistically on some dominant language simplified systems • While a pidgin is used by speakers of different • As you should expect, pidgins are very simple languages, it is typically based on the lexicon of what in their linguistic properties.